Search results

A major paradigm shift focusing on the dark side of leadership has generated lots of concern for organizations as leadership has cascading effects on employees’ behaviour. This study aims to understand negative behaviours in the organization as a system of interrelated interaction initiated from the top which trickles down to employees.

Drawing on the theories of social exchange and norms of reciprocity, social learning and displaced aggression, this study models how and when abusive supervision relates to employees’ task performance. The model is empirically tested and extended to cover mediation and moderation processes. Drawing data from 218 bank supervisors and employees, this study uses the structural equation modelling to analyse a trickle-down model of abusive supervision.

Results from multi-waved, multi-sourced data indicated a mediating effect on the abusive supervision–performance relationships and provided support for employees’ guilt proneness and emotional dissonance as moderators. Overall, the results provided support for a moderated mediation relationship in the trickle-down model.

This study provides new knowledge into the potential boundary conditions of employees’ guilt proneness and emotional dissonance in affecting the relationship between abusive supervision, counterproductive work behaviour and task performance.

The purpose of this research is to examine the narratives of victims of abusive supervision. We explore the meaning or “lessons” victims derive from those experiences and how they shape the victims’ views of self, work and organization in relation to navigating their subsequent jobs.

We analyzed how appraisals of supervisory abuse transform victims’ narratives and their consequent work attitudes through sensemaking processes. Semi-structured interviews with the past victims of abusive supervision generated a four-stage model of how sensemaking shapes victims’ future work attitudes. Our interpretations were guided through narrative thematic analysis based on the constructionist approach.

Victims’ lessons learned are predominantly framed by their retrospective post-event appraisal of abuse (based on its severity) once individuals are no longer subject to abusive supervision. With greater distance from the abuse, victims can process the abuse and better understand the motivation of the abuser, enabling the process of causal attributions. These attributions further shape victims’ narratives and future work attitudes through a complex interplay of retrospective and prospective sensemaking mechanisms. The victims broadly reported proactive (with higher self-awareness and endurance) and reactive (self-protection, and emotional scars) lessons. A four-stage model was proposed based on our findings.

Abusive supervision remains a persistent issue experienced by many individuals at some point in their working life. However, little is known about how victims make sense of the event post-abuse and how this sense-making guides their future work behaviors. Understanding this phenomenon provides insight into how employees navigate through adversity and construct a more positive future. The contribution of this narrative inquiry is threefold. First, it explores how individual appraisals of supervisory abuse frame their (1) mechanisms of narrative construction; and (2) future work attitudes. Second, our findings demonstrate how narrative construction is a fluid process often informed by the process of retrospective and prospective sensemaking. Finally, our research suggests two broader categories of lessons that victims internalize and carry forward to their subsequent jobs.

The purpose of this qualitative exploratory study was to investigate the capacity of job crafting to serve as a viable response to abusive supervision. Although considerable literature has emerged on employee reactions to abusive supervision, the role of job crafting as a coping mechanism has received relatively little attention.

Using qualitative exploration, we conducted semi-structured interviews to examine how individuals engage in job crafting as a means to respond to or cope with abusive supervision. Critical Incident Interview Technique (CIIT) was used to obtain in-depth details of this topic. We analyzed the interview-based data using the thematic analysis (TA) technique. We also integrated topic modeling to cluster the identified categories of job crafting behaviors within our TA. The cultural context of our findings was further analyzed using interpretive phenological analysis (IPA).

The results of our thematic analysis led to four recurring themes in the interview-data: (1) Job crafting as a viable coping response to abusive supervision; (2) The type of coping relates to the type of crafting: Approach and Avoidance; (3) The role of perceived control; (4) Emotions play a role in the type of crafting employed. Findings from our IPA generated the following super-ordinate themes. (1) Job crafting fluidity, (2) effectiveness of job crafting, (3) resilience and (4) cultural dynamics.

This research reveals the ways in which individuals may turn to job crafting behaviors as a means to cope following instances of abusive supervision. Given the qualitative exploration of our research approach, we identify generalizability to be an issue.

Job crafting is a proactive phenomenon that equips employees with coping abilities in the workplace. While Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) suggested that job crafting behaviors tend to be hidden from management, there may be merit in organizations explicitly acknowledging the benefits of allowing employees to be active agents in their work, capable of using multiple domains of job crafting to improve their personal and professional lives (Petrou et al., 2017).

The current research reveals the ways in which individuals may turn to job crafting behaviors as a means to cope, following instances of abusive supervision. We further fine-grained our analysis to explicate employee job crafting behaviors in response to abusive supervision within a cross-cultural domain.

Adopting the social information processing theory and social comparison theory, the purpose of this paper is to examine how abusive supervision and abusive supervisory climate jointly influence salesperson creativity, sales team creativity, and team performance.

The study conducted hierarchical linear modeling and hierarchical regression to analyze the paired data from 102 sales teams comprising 319 salespeople and 102 managers.

At the individual level, abusive supervision had negative effect on salesperson creativity via psychological safety. Abusive supervisory climate played a cross-level moderating role in the relationship between abusive supervision and psychological safety. At the team level, abusive supervisory climate was negatively related to sales team creativity via averaged salesperson creativity and negatively associated with sales team performance through sales team creativity.

This study adds to knowledge of how abusive supervision and abusive supervisory climate jointly affect salesperson psychological safety and creativity. It also contributes to abusive supervision and creativity literature by linking abusive supervisory climate and sales team creativity by integrating social information processing theory and social comparison theory.

Departing from previous research which shows that abusive supervision, as a salient job demand, induces detrimental employee outcomes, this study examines how to create constructive consequences of abusive supervision. To do so, the authors identify the boundary conditions to change the negative effect of supervisory abuse on employees’ work engagement in a positive direction. The authors examine the interactive moderating effect of a personal resource (i.e. positive causal attribution of abusive supervision) and a job resource (i.e. workplace friendship) on the relationship between abusive supervision and work engagement.

The authors used data from a two-wave survey of 697 full-time workers with a time interval of one month and conducted three-way interaction analyses to test their hypothesized model.

Abusive supervision increases employees’ work engagement when they make a positive causal attribution of abusive supervision (i.e. interpreting their abusive supervisor’s motives as promoting their job performance, rather than as intentionally harming them) and have favorable workplace friends.

The authors study offers a novel picture of abusive supervision by revealing that supervisory abuse can enhance employees’ work engagement when it is coupled with proper personal and job resources. In addition, this study highlights that in order to identify constructive effects of abusive supervision, it is critical to delve into the interaction between resources from these two domains to deal with abusive supervision.

The present research aims to empirically test the “Barriers to abusive supervision model” to find how employee-related (core self-evaluations) and situational factors (perceived job dependency) make an employee trapped in the spiral of supervisory abuse. In addition, the work–family spillover lens is used to explain how employees' retaliation is targeted at their families in response to abuse from their bosses.

The current study has employed a three-wave longitudinal moderated mediation design and analysed data from 265 employees working in the hospitality industry of Pakistan.

The results of this study have shown that low core-self evaluations put employees in a spiral of supervisory abuse and they instil aggression towards their families. This association is further strengthened when employees are dependent on their job.

This study is one of the first to use the “Barriers to Abusive supervision” model to answer who and in which conditions tend to trap in the spiral of abuse and integrate the work-to-family interface model for elaborating the outcomes to the family domain.

To date, research focus has been on overt forms of abusive supervision, like aggressive behavior and physical violence. Less clear is the effect of implicit abusive supervisory behaviors such as gaslighting, a form of psychological manipulation whereby a “gaslighter” seeks to confuse, disorientate, and cast doubt in the mind of a victim. In this study, we aim to examine the effects of supervisory gaslighting on employee's affective organizational commitment (AOC). We also investigate the mediating role of leader-member exchange (LMX) on this relationship and whether employee emotional intelligence (EI) buffers the negative effects of supervisory abuse.

Two hundred and sixty-six participants were allocated to one of three conditions (high, medium, and none) where they read workplace scenarios varying in the level of supervisory gaslighting. Afterward, participants responded to AOC, LMX, and EI scales.

Results showed supervisory gaslighting decreases employee AOC and that this relationship is partly explained by the employee's relationship with their supervisor. Contrary to expectations, higher employee EI strengthened the effect of gaslighting on AOC.

Supervisory gaslighting remains largely unexplored and this chapter contributes to this topic by testing a model to understand the effects of gaslighting on AOC. These findings provide a solid foundation for further research in this area.

Drawing on conservation of resources theory, this study aims to develop a resource-based model depicting a decreased level of psychological resourcefulness – relational energy, as a novel explanatory mechanism that accounts for the harm of abusive supervision, and we further investigate the role of leader humor as a boundary condition.

We applied multilevel path analysis to test our hypotheses with three-time-point survey data collected from 226 supervisor-employee dyads in a telecommunication company in China across six months.

Our results show that abusive supervision is negatively related to employee relational energy, leading to a subsequent decline in employee job performance. The predictions of the depleting effects get alleviated by leader humor.

This study foregrounds the importance of employee relationship management in the workplace and reveals that some abusive supervisors may manage to sustain employee performance and relational energy by using humor in their interactions, which necessitates immediate intervention.

These findings offer novel insights into the deleterious impact of abusive supervision by demonstrating the critical role of relational energy in dyadic interactions. We also reveal the potential dark side of leader humor in the context of abuse in the workplace.

Supervisory abuse is a form of destructive leadership. Research has continued to document many deleterious consequences associated with such improper behavior at work. This study further extends its consequences by testing a model linking abusive supervision to job apathy through a climate of fear.

This study drew on affective events theory in investigating the role of the climate of fear in instances where casual workers perceive abuse in commercial banks. A three-wave and three-week time lag approach was adopted for data collection from 245 casual workers in southeastern Nigeria.

Results from partial least squares structural equation modeling supported the model by showing that abusive supervision had a direct positive relationship with the climate of fear and job apathy, while the climate of fear related positively to job apathy. Results also revealed that the climate of fear partially mediated the relationship between abusive supervision and job apathy.

Managers can be trained to become more supportive and less abusive to address the problem of abusive supervision. Furthermore, casual workers are encouraged to report any abuse from their manager to higher authorities inside or outside their workplace.

This study sheds new insights and advances the abusive supervision literature by investigating the climate of fear as the underlying mechanism.

The purpose of this paper is to provide empirical evidence of the linkages between such negative workplace behaviors as abusive supervision and coworker bullying (CB)/mobbing; also, the study explores the linkages between such negative behaviors and work-life outcomes.

The authors use “negative acts,” abusive supervision, and workplace bullying/mobbing and develop work-life outcomes scales to test a data set collected from randomly selected respondents in the Midwest of the USA. The two-stage data collection offsets common method variance.

The authors find evidence that American supervisors and employees commit negative behavioral acts rarely. However, the data analyses indicate that many significant relationships exist among negative acts, abusive supervision, CB/mobbing, and employee well-being.

Companies are reluctant to allow surveying their employees on the subject of negative acts. Therefore, respondents in this study are a random sample. Many statistically significant interrelationships were detected.

This study will reinvigorate discussion on workplace negative behaviors, bullying, and their effects on employee well-being.

Addressing and reducing negative workplace behaviors will reduce employee stress and anxiety and improve the quality of employees’ work and life.

The scales were selected and developed, and the data set was constructed specifically for this study; the interactions of negative acts, abusive supervision, CB and mobbing, and work-life outcomes are tested together in a workplace scenario for the first time.